At the heart of the problem lies the fantasy that Islam must be very similar to other religions, particularly Judaism and Christianity, out of which it was, in fact derived.

The use of force, mainly through jihad, is a basic doctrine in the Qur'an, the Prophetic sayings (ahadith), and in all manuals of Islamic law. It is on these sources that fighters from Islamic State, al-Qa'ida, al-Shabaab, and hundreds of other groupings base their preaching and their actions. To say that such people have "nothing to do with Islam" could not be more wrong.

Recently, US National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster once again downplayed the significance of faith by claiming that Islamic ideology is "irreligious"; meanwhile, up to 1.5 billion Muslims continue claiming, as they have done for 1400 years, that it is.

As Stephen Coughlin, an expert on Islam, told Gatestone, "It is the believers who define their religion, not the non-believers. If someone says his religion is that the moon is made of green cheese, that has to be your starting point."

On February 20, 2017, President Trump appointed McMaster, a serving Lieutenant General of the US Army, to the important position of National Security Advisor, after the forced resignation of Michael T. Flynn. McMaster came to the post with a reputation for stability, battlefield experience, and intelligence. According to the Los Angeles Times:

"It is not an overstatement to say that Americans and the world should feel a little safer today," tweeted Andrew Exum, an author and academic who saw combat in Afghanistan and writes widely about military affairs."

After the controversies surrounding McMaster's predecessor in office, McMaster came as a safe hand.

It was not long before divisions opened up within the NSC, however, with quarrels, firings, and appeals to the president. Many controversies remain today. By July, it was reported that Trump was planning to fire McMaster and replace him with CIA Director Mike Pompeo. By August, however, McMaster's position seemed secure.

It is not the purpose of this article to discuss issues McMaster's spell at the NSC has brought to light, except for one: McMaster's position on Islam and terrorism. It became a cause for contention early in McMaster's incumbency and continues to engender divisions, not just among NSC staff, but also with the president. The general's viewpoint, which he has often expressed, is that international terrorism has nothing to do with the religion of Islam, a notion he seems to believe to the point where he has banned the use of the term "radical Islamic terrorism" -- a term that Trump uses often.

In an all-hands meeting of the NSC on February 23, 2017, three days after his appointment as NSC Director, McMaster said jihadist terrorists are not true to their professed religion and that the use of the phrase "radical Islamic terrorism" does not help the US in working with allies to defeat terrorist groups:

"The phrase is unhelpful because terrorist organizations like ISIS represent a perversion of Islam, and are thus un-Islamic, McMaster said, according to a source who attended the meeting."

More recently, on December 3, in an interview with Fox News Sunday anchor Chris Wallace, McMaster stated that "we make sure we never buy into or reinforce the terrorist narrative, this false narrative that this is a war of religion". He followed this by elaborating on the criminality and supposed secularism of Muslim terrorists:

"Those who adhere to this ideology are really irreligious criminals who use a perverted, what the President has called a wicked interpretation of religion, in an effort to recruit young, impressionable people to their cause, to foment hatred".

In taking that stance, McMaster has broken with many members of his own staff, several of whom he was later to fire, and with the Trump administration itself. This desire to deny a connection between Islam and terrorism or to distinguish between a "pure" Islamic religion and "perversions" of it had been for many years a characteristic of the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations, as well as Hillary Clinton's tweets, when "this has nothing to do with Islam" was an oft-repeated refrain.

One of the people whom McMaster fired is Richard Higgins, a top NSC official who had written a memoir in which he warned of the dangers of radical Islam and its alliance with the far Left. In a lengthy document, Higgins wrote:

Globalists and Islamists recognize that for their visions to succeed, America, both as an ideal and as a national and political identity, must be destroyed...Islamists ally with cultural Marxists...[but] Islamists will co-opt the movement in its entirety...

Because the left is aligned with Islamist organizations at local, national, and international levels, recognition should be given to the fact that they seamlessly interoperate through coordinated synchronized interactive narratives...

These attack narratives are pervasive, full spectrum, and institutionalized at all levels. They operate in social media, television, the 24-hour news cycle in all media and are entrenched at the upper levels of the bureaucracies.

Clearly, Higgins did not mince his words, yet what he wrote seems entirely appropriate for the NSC, a body charged with the protection of the United States from radicalism of all kinds. According to Meira Svirsky, writing for the Clarion Project

Higgins's stress on the lack of education about Islam is a vital recognition that something has been going wrong for years when it comes to American and European official responses to the religion and its followers. Rightly cautious about genuine Islamophobia, the growth of hate speech and intercommunal strife, governments and their agencies have adopted policies and measures to preserve calm even in the face of growing levels of terrorism by Muslims. Europeans in Paris, Barcelona, Manchester, London, Brussels, Berlin and Nice, to name just a few places, are at the forefront of attacks inspired by Islamic State, al-Qa'ida and other radical groups. But the US has suffered the heaviest casualties, with thousands slaughtered in the 9/11 attacks.

In the face of a renascent and at times violent Islam, politicians have adopted the policy of denying any connection between terrorist events and Islam. Many religious leaders have done the same. McMaster has adopted this policy, keeping him in line with established approaches:

"HR McMaster, a respected army lieutenant general, struck notes more consistent with traditional counterterrorism analysts and espoused consensus foreign-policy views during a meeting he held with his new National Security Council staff on Thursday".

According to Svirsky:

McMaster believes the "Islamic State is not Islamic," going so far as to describe jihadists as "really irreligious organizations." As did former president Obama, he opposes use of any language that connects Islam to terrorism.

McMaster also rejects the notion that jihadists are motivated by religious ideology. Instead, he says they are motivated by "fear," a "sense of honor" and their "interests," which he describes as the roots of human conflict for thousands of years. He believes U.S. policy must be based on "understanding those human dimensions."

There may be signs that McMaster, though he still has some way to go, at least recognizes that some deeply religious Islamic organizations are a threat to the West. Writing on December 13, Meira Svirsky cites a speech McMaster gave at Policy Exchange in Washington:

"Declaring the ideology of radical Islam an obvious and 'grave threat to all civilized people,' U.S. National Security Adviser General H.R. McMaster singled out the Muslim Brotherhood and its brand of political Islam as a specific threat".

In that speech, the general spoke of Turkey and Egypt as two major sources of support for the Brotherhood, including its Palestinian branch, Hamas. He clearly sees the threat, but does not, as yet, fully understand the meaning of its religious dimension (however much other factors play a role in terrorism).

I have no wish to be disrespectful towards McMaster, who carries out a vital task in securing the lives and property of so many Americans, but I fear his statements show that he has little or no knowledge of Islam, its teachings, or its history. Either that or he has invented a form of Islam that bears no resemblance to the religion that many of us have spent most of our lives studying. Not implausibly, he has given ears to advisors, possibly including Muslims, who have sought to play down any possible link between violence and the Muslim faith.

This willingness, even eagerness, to misrepresent Islam plays directly into the hands of anti-Western Muslims, radicals who anticipate the coming of an apocalyptic global Caliphate. In a recent article, Professor Richard Landes of Boston University lists the many ways in which this is done:

Only the most fervent of true believers could think that, even with Allah's help, the global Caliphate was possible. In order to succeed, da'wa [outreach; proselytizing] Caliphaters needed the assistance of the targeted kuffar population to:

Disguise their ambition to subject the kuffar, by downplaying jihadi acts of war and their deployment among the targeted population.

Insist that "except for a tiny minority," the "vast majority" of Muslims are moderate and peaceful, and Islam is a "Religion of Peace" that has nothing to do with the violence of jihadists.

Accept those who fight for the Caliphate with da'wa as "moderates" who have "nothing to do" with "violent extremists."

Engage these "moderate" Caliphaters as advisors and consultants in intelligence and police work, as prison chaplains, community liaisons, college teachers, and administrators.

Present Caliphater war propaganda as reliable information, as news.

Attack those who criticize Islam (including Muslims) as xenophobic and racist Islamophobes.

Adopt the Caliphater's apocalyptic enemy as their own, so that the kuffar join in an attack on one of their key allies.

Legitimate jihadi terrorism as "resistance" and denounce any recourse to violence in their own defense as "terrorism."

Respect the dignity of Muslim beliefs even as Muslims heap disdain on their beliefs.

Take seriously Caliphater invocations of human rights when, in reality, they despise those rights for women, slaves, and infidels.

Welcome an angry "Muslim Street" in the heart of their capital cities.

At the heart of the problem lies the fantasy that Islam must be very similar to other religions, particularly Judaism and Christianity, out of which it was, in fact derived. This would mean that Islam consists only of doctrines about a single God, heaven and hell, sin and punishment, spiritual endeavor, together with practices such as prayer, fasting, pilgrimage, and alms-giving. There would be nothing to concern us were that the case, and certainly no reason to connect the faith with a few supposedly fanatical people who have misguidedly distorted it and turned to violence.

But that would be to ignore the totality of Islam. Apart from 12 years at the start of Muhammad's mission, Islam has encompassed far more than worship and moral behavior. From the moment Muhammad led his followers from Mecca to Medina in the year 622, his religion became a system of government, of law, and of war. Several battles were fought with his Meccan opponents; the Jews of Medina were either driven out by force or executed and enslaved, and Muhammad returned to Mecca as its conqueror. On his death, his first successor embarked on a two-year war to bring recalcitrant tribes back within the fold, sent out armies to the north and, in just a few years, began the wave of invasions that made Muslims victorious across most of the known world. Of the first four "rightly-guided" caliphs, one was assassinated by an Iranian captive and the other two by other Muslims. Muhammad's grandson, Husayn, was killed with his family in Karbala in 680 by the second of the Umayyad caliphs, before further internal wars. Jihadi wars continued, year in and year out, after that; they are still invoked by modern terrorists. Islam has never been at peace with the non-Muslim world.

The use of force, mainly through jihad, is a basic doctrine in the Qur'an, the prophetic sayings (ahadith), and in all manuals of Islamic law. (For examples, see here, here, here and here.)

If jihad were permitted only in self-defence, then excuses implying aggression, as we have seen, would need to be readily available to justify attacks. As the Washington Post wrote a fortnight after the attack on the United States on 9/11/2001:

At the heart of the bin Laden opus are two declarations of holy war -- jihad -- against America. The first, issued in 1996, was directed specifically at "Americans occupying the land of the two holy places," as bin Laden refers to his native Saudi Arabia, where 5,000 U.S. troops have been stationed since the 1991 Persian Gulf War. The two holy places are Muslim shrines at Mecca and Medina.

In 1998, he broadened the edict to include the killing of "Americans and their allies, civilians and military . . . in any country in which it is possible to do it."

It is on such Islamic sources that fighters from Islamic State, al-Qa'ida, al-Shabaab, and hundreds of other groupings base their preaching and their actions. To say that such people have "nothing to do with Islam" could not be more wrong.

It is not only wrong, it is demeaning to the many ex-Muslims such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali or Ibn Warraq and reformist Muslims who are fully aware of the connection, but are often apparently considered delusional or even fanatical. Last year saw the publication of Ibn Warraq's detailed study, The Islam in Islamic Terrorism: The Importance of Beliefs, Ideas, and Ideology, which takes the reader through all the violent or violence-promoting individuals and groups in Islamic history, with discursions on the thinking behind them. With few exceptions, these individuals and groups are far from minor or obscure.

In chapter one of his book, Ibn Warraq examines what he calls the "Root Cause Fallacy", whereby politicians, security advisers, and others deflect attention from religion as a motivator for terrorism. He shows that most radicals and terrorists are not primarily inspired or justified by poverty, lack of knowledge of Islam, lack of education, the Arab-Israeli conflict, Palestine, anti-Semitism, U.S. Foreign policy, Western Imperialism, or revenge for the Crusades. He refers (p. 31) to David Wurmser of the American Enterprise Institute and his view that:

"Westerners attribute too many of the Arab world's problems 'to specific material issues' such as land and wealth. This usually means a tendency 'to belittle belief and strict adherence to principle as genuine and dismiss it as a cynical exploitation of the masses by politicians. As such, Western observers see material issues and leaders, not the spiritual state of the Arab world, as the heart of the problem'".

Overall, Ibn Warraq draws on an extensive body of scholarship, mainly from leading Western scholars of Islam and authoritative sources such as The Encyclopedia of Islam. McMaster and others, who repeat the mantra that Islamic terrorism has nothing to do with Islam, are hardly in a position to override comment by individuals who have spent a lifetime deeply involved in the study of Islam through its original sources.

Ibn Warraq, moreover, cites (pp. 139-140) several Western and Muslim scholars who have said repeatedly that the idea that the "true jihad is a spiritual struggle" is completely unauthentic. It is arguments based on a reading of texts in Arabic, Persian, Urdu and other languages that deserve to be treated as the basis for policy-making, identifying which people may be potential terrorists, or evaluating the true intentions of US-based Muslim associations such as CAIR or ISNA.

Clare Lopez, vice president of research and analysis at the Washington-based Center for Security Policy, has commented on the broad lack of knowledge about Islam and how it has distorted thinking within national bodies. Beginning with criticism of McMaster, she raises broader issues:

McMaster is just wrong for NSC on so many counts. I think at least in part because, like others across national security at his level, who made rank in years post-9/11, he was systematically denied fact-based training about Islam, jihad, Shariah and the MB [Muslim Brotherhood] – whose affiliates, associates, operatives, fellow travelers and useful fools remain embedded within and close to the federal government and local law enforcement at various levels.

Now, of course, anyone who's ever taken the oath to the Constitution has an affirmative obligation to know the enemy and that McMaster did not do this is his responsibility alone.

Those who got promoted within the military-security establishment over the past eight years got there precisely because of a "willful blindness about Islam".

The problem for the United States government, Congress, Senate -- and many important agencies which find themselves called on to discuss, monitor, report on, or make policies about Islam, American Muslims, Muslims worldwide, and more -- is knowing where to look for accurate and authentic information. In the past, all of these have depended on Muslim academics, uncritical and cosmetic non-Muslim professors and commentators such as John Esposito, Karen Armstrong and the many teachers identified by Campus Watch; numerous university and college Islamicists with vested interests in posts funded by Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and other Muslim states (see here); self-appointed Islamic authorities such as CAIR, and amateurs within US institutions.

Criticism of Islam has become taboo and has been denounced as a right-wing or even far-right prejudice. The present writer, however, a political centrist, sees nothing wrong in bringing reasoned and fact-based criticism to bear on Islam, just as one would to every other ideology, from Marxism to Fascism. One can also appreciate the stunning contributions Muslims have made to science, art, architecture, calligraphy, music, and the spiritual endeavors of Sufis and Shi'i mystical philosophers. It is important for everyone to step back and bring accuracy and balance to the way we regard a large and expanding religion.

Denis MacEoin has an MA in Persian, Arabic and Islamic History from Edinburgh University and a PhD (1979) in an aspect of Shi'i Islam in 19th-century Iran. He taught Arabic and Islamic Studies in the Religious Studies Department of Newcastle University and has published many books and articles on Islamic topics.

[1] There is evidence that the international Muslim Brotherhood is working for influence in US politics and that it has already placed people within several US bodies. See here.

Comment on this item

54 Reader Comments

Honestly, I find it bewildering that at this late stage in early 2018, that we are even having to have the discussion over "Does Jihad Really Have "Nothing to do with Islam"?"

Of course it does. And one only has to open up the nearest copy of the Koran to confirm it for themselves - or go on Youtube and listen to a hundred thousand different clerics, sheik's and imam's - all who will tell you exactly where in the Koran to find the justification for - and the permission to carry out, jihad.

I'm done with listening to liars like McMaster trying to promote their own agenda. If people won't self educate - then more fool them.

Reply->

William A Carr • Feb 26, 2018 at 06:35

The basic question is if they are not religious why do they bother? If they just want power and money there are plenty of opportunities in every Islamic nation, the vast majority of which are among the most corrupt on earth. So why fight to the death over it? That theory just makes no sense at all. If McMaster is as intelligent as is claimed by his fans he should understand this.

Reply->

Alan • Feb 26, 2018 at 04:20

The caution of politicians who wield actual power in recognising Islam ideology as the source of the threat is understandable. The implications of doing so are immense.

1. What then will be the status of Muslims living in the West? Many were born here and some hold quite senior positions in our hierarchy. They will not easily surrender their Islamic identity.

2. What about the rules protecting freedom of worship etc? Should we re-classify Islam as primarily a totalitarian ideology? Do we rewrite the laws to exclude protection for Islam?

3. What about our relationship with Islamic countries that, thanks to petro-dollars, hold significant stakes in our economies and are often good customers for our major companies?

4. What about the many non-Muslims here who do not perceive a threat from Islamic ideology and will find an about face by governments, probably in the face of media opposition driven by concerns about point 1, very hard to comprehend?

Islamic ideology does represent a very serious threat and to my mind there are two keys to addressing that threat:

a. Education about the true nature of Islam-sharia, particularly the ECHR ruling that sharia is incompatible with democracy and human rights.

b. On the back of that educational drive, breaking the inter-generational transmission of Islam.

How we address that educational deficit is key to my mind. Many I've spoken to acknowledge that there are issues with Islamic ideology but then conflate that with concerns about Muslims as individuals and concerns about possible crackdowns on Islamic identity.

Reply->

Ron Thompson Alan • Mar 1, 2018 at 11:55

These comments accurately reflect the very real practical concerns in explicitly facing the challenge of the Koran's supremacist theology and ideology.
Unfortunately it's not clear that any major leader of a Western country, nor any widely acknowledged public intellectual, has actually articulated them in his or her own mind. (Alan gives the best reason for this failure in his final paragraph about the self-defeating impulse to "conflate" the two concerns).It remains to be seen how much more violence and increased threat has to be endured before some individual or group steps onto the stage to deal with this "educational deficit".Thanks for this important step in that direction.

Reply->

Harvey L • Feb 25, 2018 at 11:52

This article should be compulsory reading for most Western politicians, it won't happen, though, because it shows Islam in a bad light for what it is.

Reply->

Dr Michael A CALVO • Feb 25, 2018 at 07:34

I would like to give an extract of my book, "The Middle East and World War III – Why No Peace" and then give an extract of a declaration of Al-Sisi at Al Azar University:

Indeed a Qur'an, in its final version, that has two Qur'ans:

"...The first one, spiritual, book of peace and tolerance and a second, legislative and military, which calls for Jihad and intolerance."

Indeed, the Qur'an has "Surahs and verses revealed in Mecca and others in Medina. And

"In case of contradiction the last word of Allah prevails. Thus, by this rule, the Qur'an is stripped of more than 114 "soft", peaceful, previously revealed verses..."

However, a chronological order is delivered to us thanks to the studies of the scholars of Islam, which distinguish the Meccan Surahs and the Medina Surahs. The result is a chronology with heavy consequences, because the principle of abrogation comes into play (a verse repealing is "nasikh", an abrogated verse is "mansukh"), abrogating what is contained in the Qur'an itself.

The fight against the infidels, the idolaters, the non-believers, and the Jews and the Christians, is declared starting with these two verses:

"Then, when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they repent, and perform the prayer, and pay the alms, then let them go their way; God is All-forgiving,"

"Fight those who believe not in God and the Last Day and do not forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden -- such men as practice not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book -- until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled."

The idolaters to be fought unless they convert to Islam are the Hindus, the Buddhists, the Yazidis, the Polytheists, the Pantheists, and in a general manner all those who do not believe in the religion of truth, i.e. Islam. Having received the Bible, the Jews and the Christians have a special status: they are people of the Book but they are infidels and they must be fought until they pay the tribute and are humbled. Since today they are not humbled and do not pay the tribute, they must be fought.

In his January 22, 2015 speech before the World Economic Forum at Davos, Egyptian President Abd Al Fattah Al-Sisi stated again: "The terrorist attacks and the ugly image of the Muslims shown to the world have made us say that we need to take pause, and cleanse our religious discourse of the erroneous notions that have led to this extremism and terrorism. This can only be done by the scholars of Al-Azhar, and by religious scholars who care about Islam, and about the situation of the Muslims vis-à-vis the world...No religious discourse can clash with its environment and the world. Therefore, we Muslims must reexamine our discourse." MEMRI TV, Video No. 4751, Egyptian President Al-Sisi at Davos. Excerpts of his address, broadcast on Channel 1 (Egyptian Television), Video clip at https://www.memri.org/tv/egyptian-president-al-sisi-davos-time-has-proven-genius-nature-sadats-peace-initiative.

Later, on December 28, 2015, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, before Al-Azhar University in Cairo and the Awqaf Ministry (Religious endowments) on December 28, 2015, and in connection to Prophet Muhammad's upcoming birthday:

"We spoke earlier about the importance of the religious discourse, and I would like to reiterate that we are not doing enough with regard to true religious discourse. The problem has never been with our faith. Perhaps the problem lies in ideology, and this ideology is sanctified among us. I am talking about religious discourse that is in keeping with its times...I am addressing the religious scholars and clerics. We must take a long, hard look at the current situation. I have talked about this several times in the past. We must take a long, hard look at the situation we are in. It is inconceivable that the ideology we sanctify should make our entire nation a source of concern, danger, killing, and destruction all over the world. It is inconceivable that this ideology... I am referring not to "religion," but to "ideology" – the body of ideas and texts that we have sanctified in the course of centuries, to the point that challenging them has become very difficult... It has reached the point that [this ideology] is hostile to the entire world. Is it conceivable that 1.6 billion [Muslims] would kill the world's population of seven billion, so that they could live [on their own]? This is inconceivable. I say these things here, at Al-Azhar, before religious clerics and scholars. May Allah bear witness on Judgment Day to the truth of your intentions, regarding what I say to you today. You cannot see things clearly when you are locked [in this ideology]. You must emerge from it and look from outside, in order to get closer to a truly enlightened ideology. You must oppose it with resolve. Let me say it again: We need to revolutionize our religion... Honorable Imam [the Grand Sheik of Al-Azhar], you bear responsibility before Allah. The world in its entirety awaits your words, because the Islamic nation is being torn apart, destroyed, and is heading to perdition. We ourselves are bringing it to perdition.

Is McMaster following the phrase most popular in foreign ministry chancelleries: "It matters little what the truth is, but rather what is useful"? But it is really useful?

Transmit that to McMaster.

Reply->

Ron Thompson Dr Michael A CALVO • Mar 1, 2018 at 11:41

Thanks for this excellent primer, first on the importance of the doctrine of "abrogation" in understanding the true meaning of the Koran. (incidentally, doesn't this mean that Allah changed his mind and reversed his message, more a mark of human duplicity than godly greatness?).And second, for highlighting the remarks of el-Sisi, which impressed me at the time. Not until remembering Ataturk, who attacked Islam and abolished the Caliphate after WW I, has any Muslim leader so explicitly and candidly confronted the violent message of Islam. (It remains unfortunate however, that the General has attacked peaceful human rights advocates the same way he has gone after the violent members of the Muslim Brotherhood, and ISIS followers in the Sinai.)

Reply->

Dean • Feb 25, 2018 at 06:28

When you reach a point where people high up are willing to admit that Islamic religion/ideology is the key to the jihad, war and genocide we witness on a daily basis in Syria, Libya, Afghanistan. Yemen, Gaza, etc. – the Caliphates won and lost – the quest for nuclear supremacy by a religiously fanatical Iranian Islamic State dictatorship and all the other terrorism set up to push Jews and others out of existence, the defenders of Islam always come back with some other excuses for looking the other way, ignoring reality and hiding the truth.

They tell us that it does not good to lay blame. That it hampers our ability to partner with those who help us to fight terrorism. That it forces the many Muslims who are welcomed by open-door immigration policies to become isolated in no-go zones that we are somehow responsible for creating. That we are a racist Western nation filled with "Islamophobia." The list goes on and on.

Well, if we do not stop being apologists for Islam and allow their representatives to infiltrate to control the agenda and the messaging, then we are done for. There is a social experiment being conducted in the West and it is not going very well – soon the growing mistakes we are making will turn us into countries without borders where the borders will be transferred to the cities and towns with lines clearly drawn between the sharia zones and non-sharia zones and with lots of crime, terrorism and poverty to both destabilize Western life but also bring us down to their level of barbarity and violence.

Reply->

Carl B • Feb 25, 2018 at 04:40

The most fundamental thing to know - Islam is not a religion. Only non-Muslims call it a religion. Islam is a complete way of life, a complete civilization.

More than a half of the doctrine of Islam (found on the Qur'an and Sunna) doesn't deal with how to be a Muslim, but with how to deal with non-Muslims and establish the rule of Islam.

An ideology that strives to take control over the lives of those who do not subscribe to it is a political ideology.

An ideology that strives to control every aspect of life of those who it governs is a totalitarian ideology.

Reply->

Abhishek Ghosh • Feb 24, 2018 at 19:38

So why does McMaster still have his job ? He obviously has some strong backers, even stronger than Trump.

Who are they ?

Reply->

Nicholas Ginex • Feb 24, 2018 at 19:17

Thank you, Denis MacEoin for your article. All one needs to do is read the Qur'an and "see" it advocates the use of force, mainly through jihad, with the objective that Islam shall prevail over every other religion (Qur'an 9:33).

McMaster lacks an understanding of the true nature of Islam' beliefs by being poorly educated about the history of Islam. His statement, "we make sure we never buy into or reinforce the terrorist narrative, this false narrative that this is a war of religion." shows that he has hoodwinked by the propaganda of the Bush and Obama presidencies that Islam is a "religion of peace". McMaster should be fired from his position by President Trump because he is not able to comprehend the scope of Islam as a cancer that has, and is, successfully destroying the values, culture, and freedoms of people wherever Muslims migrate to.

What is needed today is to replace reporting of Islam as a threat to the world with the truth that Islam is a religion that seeks to dominate the world. People need to read the Qur'an and learn of its many abominable verses. A solution to solve the Islamic threat is for people to engage in a Worldwide Communication campaign that will EXPOSE the despicable history of Islam and abominable verses in the Qur'an. Through communication between people around the world, Muslims will be able to help themselves by forcing their religious leaders to REVISE the Qur'an.

To learn WHY and HOW the Qur'an can be EXPOSED, read the article, "EXPOSE the Qur'an With Worldwide Communication" via the link: http://iranpoliticsclub.net/club/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=2020

Reply->

SaEFan • Feb 24, 2018 at 18:41

Gen McMaster is probably working from the assumption that if you repeat something untrue about an opponent often enough, ultimately the opponent will accept it as truth. Or at least sufficient numbers from among the opponent to disrupt and reduce its power.I hope he is correct. However, we do need to understand that "religion" and "way of life" and "law" and "tradition" are all one and the same in the minds of non-westeners. The current rifts within Christianity and Judaism are also about the same problem: today western culture differentiates deeply between all the above, each being defined differently. Not so in Islam. This fundamental verity must be understood.It is not about texts - it is about culture.

Reply->

Dennis Hulse • Feb 24, 2018 at 18:26

The first 12 years of Muhammad's mission was peaceful but ineffective at expanding Islam. So tolerance and acceptance of non Muslims was changed to rejection, and forceful or aggressive adoption of Islam with consequences for those resisting. This resulting element of fear for the many types of consequences is the energy that drove the growth of Islam ever since and into modern times.

One of the reasons why Christianity is declining is because the element of fear does not equal tolerance, the energy source of most other faiths. Only reciprocity satisfies the inherent interests of all other than Islamic belief systems. McMaster needs to add this reciprocity concept to his education materials and in this way enhance a greater level of understanding to the above article generally.

Reply->

Dajjal • Feb 24, 2018 at 18:06

Dissent! Islam is defined by the Qur'an, exemplified by Moe's sunnah and codified in shari'ah. Islam defines Believers, they do not define Islam! Believers are defined in the first five verses of Al-Anfal for those who know the code. For the rest, they are clearly defined in 9:111 & 49:15.

Each year, on Dec. 19, the UNGA reaffirms in resolutions that "Terrorism can not and should not be associated with" [...] [ISLAM]

When I learn of those resolutions, I respond with a blog post exhibiting the relevant ayat, ahadith & shari'ah. The Islamic law of the Hanifi madhab requires every Muslim to be an "object of terror to infidels" because he is "liable to attack".

When I slap down Gen. McMaster point by point, I include a gif which illustrates what he is doing.

The Reliance Of The Traveller does not mention terrorizing infidels, but it includes terrorizing Believers in a list of enormities. It does not prohibit terrorizing infidels. Book o, chapter 9.8 declares that the caliph makes war on people of the book provided he has first invited us to Islam. The Dawah precedent is also codified in Risala Ch. 30.2(b) and Hedaya 2.144 (if memory serves).

8:57 & 9:60 command Muslims to engage in terrorism. Page 326 of "The Life Of Muhammad" make that crystal clear. I posted that page. 9:120 promises Brownie Points for terrorism. Tafsir Ibn Kathir "Rewards Of Jihad" makes it crystal clear. I posted that page too.

Facts trump maundery! We have the facts, we must pound them!!

Reply->

rooare • Feb 24, 2018 at 17:57

McMaster is obviously a very intelligent person and how he can come to the conclusion he has about Islam is mind boggling, a cursory reading of Islamic doctrines in the Koran, Hadith, and Sura show without a doubt that Islamic terrorists are following Islam.

Reply->

Bikinis not Burkas • Feb 24, 2018 at 17:47

"McMaster said jihadist terrorists are not true to their professed religion"This bloke is NUTS, Donald Trump must fire him yesterday!

Quran 8:12"(Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels... "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

Reply->

Jasper • Feb 24, 2018 at 17:28

Dissimulation is one of the key precepts of Islam. In other words: "Tell the Infidel anything he wants to hear, but you still must kill him in the end." Nick Harris is absolutely correct. It's all right there in the Koran -- in black and white!! This is not rocket science, people!

Reply->

Dick Leppky • Feb 24, 2018 at 17:01

These educated bureaucrats that cannot see the forest for the trees! I'm just an average "nobody" in Canada..... and yet, I could easily teach men like McMaster all he needs to know about Islam. In a pure definition, it is not even a real 'religion' and ought to be declassified, as such. It is a political ideology that co-opts a false god, invented by an insane 'prophet', to justify their orthodox doctrine which is violent to the core.

The Islamic terrorists are the 'true' members of this ideology, anyone who does not believe as they do, are not true to this "false" ideology, falsely called a religion.

Reply->

Chuck • Feb 24, 2018 at 16:51

Anyone with any familiarity with the American military (or any military, for that matter) knows full well that McMaster did not rise through the ranks to the top level during the Obama years mouthing off about "Islamic terrorism". I have been surprised and concerned that President Trump has not gotten rid of him by now. Let McMaster go hold hands with Clapper, Brennan, and the other Obama flunkies hanging out in DC's swampier regions, as far as I am concerned. Their appeasement of "the Caliphate" is amazingly intentional or stupid considering what has already happened to Europe.

Reply->

Nick Harris • Feb 24, 2018 at 16:30

There must be thousands of intelligent National Security officials out there who are capable of simply studying the 100 plus verses in the Koran which call for the death of all non-Muslims to then conclude that it is a death cult which has no place in any civilised society.

Reply->

Commander Johnson Nick Harris • Feb 24, 2018 at 17:16

Nick:

Finally! As I read your response and the others below, I am heartened to find out I am not alone.

You need to write a letter to President Trump demanding that he declare Islam a non-religion. He won't do anything unless he hears from lots of Americans.

Reply->

Terry Gain Nick Harris • Feb 24, 2018 at 22:42

If these people have been intimidated to remain silent about the threat of Islam - not radical Islam , but Islam - it doesn't matter how many there are. The real threat is not Jihad but creeping Sharia.

Reply->

Jeff Page • Feb 24, 2018 at 15:42

That is all we hear from politicians in the West when they show support for Muslims, "it's nothing to do with Islam". Biggest load of rubbish ever and gets rolled out whenever there is a terrorist attack by "Muslims"! They have failed to recognise the fact that the majority if not all atrocities in the last few years have in fact been carried out by Muslims shouting out their familiar war cry of Allahu Akbar when murdering innocent people.

Reply->

barry • Feb 24, 2018 at 15:07

I agree, it's ludicrous to claim Islamic terror and violence have nothing to do with Islam. Nobody owns the word "Islamic" and as the article says, there is plenty of scripture and history to back up ISIS and other violent factions that they are indeed implementing their religion.

What would be interesting to know is why so many in the west refuse to recognize that. I'd suggest: the general reluctance to criticize any religion; the need for oil which is disproportionately in Islamic countries; pandering to Muslim voters.

Reply->

Dajjal barry • Feb 24, 2018 at 18:13

If vampirism was real, not fictional, what would the appropriate public policy be? Islam is the functional equivalent of vampirism: transmitted by violence and sexual reproduction, it turns victims into victimizers. If that reality was recognized, what would the appropriate public policy be?

Shoah, "Never Again"; get it?

Reply->

Mark • Feb 24, 2018 at 15:01

Recognizing that Islam is EVIL, but claiming Islam followers (Muslims) are good.....is like recognizing the KKK is evil but claiming KKK members are good. It makes no sense....it's nonsense.

A truly peaceful Muslim would leave Islam because Islam is NOT peaceful or tolerant by any stretch of the imagination.

What does Islam teach its followers? (muslims)

Islam teaches some really nasty, EVIL things

Here's a way for readers to see how "peaceful" Islam is from the comfort of their own home and learn it's sinister truth www.Quran.com

The way to use that website www.Quran.com is to search for the verse you want, here's a couple examples of verses I recommend, just copy each set of verse numbers below into the "search" bar at www.Quran.com

8:39 "fight til all religion is for allah" IE. until all people are Muslim9:5 "when sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists" Islam considers Christianity polytheists9:294:89 "if they turn away (from Islam) kill them"2:191 "and kill them wherever you overtake them, such is recompense of disbelievers (non-Muslims)"8:67 "it is not for a prophet to have captives of war (slaves) until he inflicts a slaughter upon the land"47:4 "when you meet disbeliever (non-Muslim) strike neck" see 8:39 above Islam is at war with all5:51. "take no Jew or Christian as an ally...allah guides not the wrong doers" this Quran verse proves allah is not God, because God guides Christians and Jews ...allah does not because they are "wrong doers"9:303:1518:12 "cast TERROR into hearts of disbelievers, so strike their necks & strike every fingertip"8:60 "prepare whatever steeds of war you are able that you may TERRIFY enemies of allah" non-Muslims9:11113:417:1755:334:2524:237:8838:3147:35 "do not seek peace while you are superior"Etc

Reply->

Dajjal Mark • Feb 24, 2018 at 18:21

There is another valuable resource: quranx.com/ which offers specific and general searches. The general search will present results from the Qur'an, six sittah and several tafsirs.

Islamawakened.com/ displays 50 parallel translations of each verse and a link to corpusquran.com/ an Arab/English dictionary with each verse broken down word by word and a concordance.

Nobody with internet access has an excuse for ignorance of Islam.

Reply->

Richard Mark • Feb 25, 2018 at 12:04

@MarkThe peaceful Muslims you meet in the West have been fed the same false information that Western non-Muslims have. The Islam that is in their heads is a fake. However this is less true in Muslim majority countries - where the peaceful Muslims probably realise the problem - but are effectively intimidated by their more extreme brethren.

Reply->

Louis Engelbrecht • Feb 24, 2018 at 14:57

Muhammed had a few hundred Jews beheaded and slaughtered in one day and a night and in Sura IX 5 is written that the 'kafir' unbelievers are to be killed and also the apostates are to be killed. To me Islam is more ideology than religion. Islamophobia is the best asset the Islam has. In the mean time Islamists kill our Christian brothers and sisters and abduct the young Christian women to be forced to marry Islamists. To put it plain to become their sex slaves and this is all written in the Quran and in the Hadiths.

Reply->

Dajjal Louis Engelbrecht • Feb 24, 2018 at 18:27

The correct word is Deen, also spelled Din, meaning: a complete way of life. Moe cleverly couched his charter of Arab Mafia as a religion to make it binding and shield it from critics.

Visit the internet archive, open the "all in one volume" "Sunan Abu Dawud" and search for "original religion" Read the hadith containing that term until you comprehend and memorize it.

Reply->

geoff • Feb 24, 2018 at 14:53

There is so MUCH wrong with the belief system of President Trump's National Security chief Advisor: General McMaster believes the "Islamic State is not Islamic," going so far as to describe jihadists as "really irreligious organizations." As did former President Obama, he opposes use of any language that connects Islam to terrorism.

McMaster also rejects the notion that jihadists are motivated by religious ideology. Instead, he says they are motivated by "fear," a "sense of honor" and their "interests," which he describes as the roots of human conflict for thousands of years. He believes U.S. policy must be based on "understanding those human dimensions."

How is it POSSIBLE to defeat an enemy who declares who and what they are in very clear and precise language? Does simply denying the very words of the threat make them FALSE? Is a myopic perspective based on a incorrect belief system, make that belief system correct? Is believing that 2+2 = 5 a Reality because you say it is while, at the same time, thousands upon thousands of others deny your false Reality? Does language ONLY have meaning when it conforms to what you believe? Are words spoken by individuals who believe in their meaning irrelevant to you because their meaning is unacceptable to you?

For 8 long years Obama and his administration twisted and convoluted the words of Islam directly from the mouths of the Islamo-Fascists. They collectively denied their meaning and ignored their intent and purpose. The results were dramatic. Now within the Trump Administration, another group has taken hold of the reigns of power and just like their predecessors are just as uninformed and ignorant in a very harmful way to the threat that Radical Islamic-Fascism posses to the country and the world.

These are our leaders, WHY?

Reply->

Commander Johnson • Feb 24, 2018 at 14:53

Finally Gatestone is getting closer to the glaring truth that Islam is a death cult and not a religion that is deserving of America's first amendment Constitutional protection.

But when is somebody besides me going to find the courage to stand up and proclaim it? The FBI told me that I'm on the ISIS "kill list" by name and home address. I'll bet a lot of you bed-wetters are on that list too, so you might as well find your backbones and stand with me.

Or - just wait in that "politically correct line" of wishy-washy do-nothings for the day our government bends down to these killers and take that Sharia Sharpie marker to draw the dashed line around your throat with the words, PLEASE CUT HERE.

Wake up, America!

Reply->

Mark W Commander Johnson • Feb 27, 2018 at 20:39

Little by little we are waking up the slumbering fools, thank you Commander Johnson, stay strong and carry on.
President Trump's election provided the breathing space to allow us time to wake up the rest of the country.

Reply->

Bisley • Feb 24, 2018 at 14:44

One of the more stupid decisions Trump has made in his appointments (and he's made many) was to allow the leftists and establishment Republicans he's surrounded himself with to force Gen. Flynn out, and replace him with McMaster. He now has a NSC, most of the military, intelligence agencies, State Dept., etc. run by people operating from the "Islam is a religion of peace" point of view, and many other false premises which were made official policy by the Obama and Bush administrations. If Trump's administration is going to accomplish much, other than by accident, there needs to be a purge of the upper levels of government, and people installed who will enforce sane and realistic policies on the departments and agencies they control (and put an end to the "Islam is a religion of peace", "global warming is the greatest threat to national security", and much other nonsense that has been incorporated by past administrations as official policy).

I don't understand Trump. From much of what he says and does, it appears that he rejects the PC policies of so many of his appointees, but they continue in place, and he generally goes along with their recommendations. Though he seems to disagree with much of their policy, and the ideas on which they base it, there is no indication he intends to replace them with people more in line with his understanding of the situation. If he doesn't rid himself of these people, his administration will be enforcing their policy, rather than his.

Reply->

Diana Lachappell Bisley • Feb 25, 2018 at 12:18

The minute that President Trump let Gen Flynn go I knew he was in trouble. Once the democrats and rhino's smelled blood in the water they were not going to stop. Flynn, a great choice for NSA, he was well aware of how broken intelligence agencies are and a great leader. I worked for him at DIA, the reason Obama fired him was because he was not a YES man. Flynn had been telling anyone in Washington that would listen that ISIS was a problem.

Reply->

gloria jones • Feb 24, 2018 at 14:41

I'm not an expert on Islam. But, after reading this article and others, it seems that Islam, its leaders and followers have had thousands of years of honing their manipulative skills and using these skills to conquer and control. Taking that into consideration, all western nations, in the 21st century, with leaders who understand that all that is Islam is their enemy need to band together and fight against Islam, elitist globalists like Soros, etal, corrupt politicians who want to destroy western civilization as we know it and replace it with Islam's violent, oppressive political system. Am I totally off base in my thinking?

Reply->

Andrew Halmay • Feb 24, 2018 at 14:00

Let us all play that game. Jihadists have nothing to do with Islam so when we kill them we are simply HELPING Islam, the religion of peace. When we find mullahs preaching hate in American mosques, let us march in and shoot them because they have nothing to do with Islam and are simply giving Islam a bad name. When CAIR instructs Muslims to never co-operate with our law enforcement people, we'll know that CAIR has nothing to do with Islam and so let's arrest and deport them. We must protect the peaceful Muslims from these bogus Muslims who have nothing to do with Islam - including McMaster who must be decapitated because he has nothing to do with Islam or America or rationality.

Reply->

UNCLE VLADDI Andrew Halmay • Feb 25, 2018 at 00:14

Perfectly put, Sir!

Reply->

Ron • Feb 24, 2018 at 13:40

The politically-correct myth that violent Islamist groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda represent a perversion of Islamic ideology conveniently ignores the fact that their brutal ideology is based on a very limited interpretation of traditional Islamic doctrine instead of being a deliberate misrepresentation. One of Islam's greatest flaws is its lack of a clear, non-contradictory position on the role of violence in contributing to its spread. Some passages argue against the use of violence to advance the growth of Islam whereas others encourage it. Until this conflict can be resolved in favor of universally rejecting violent jihad, Islam will continue to fail to live up to its claim of being the Religion of Peace.

Reply->

Dajjal Ron • Feb 24, 2018 at 18:53

Study the science of Naskh, the best place to begin is Brill's Encyclopedia of Islam.

Moe did not write, he recited. He revealed situational scripture to meet the needs of the moment. When caught in contradictions, he relied on abrogation which was really meant to apply to the Torah & Gospels.

First in: first out; what I say today replaces what I said yesterday.

Surah At-Taubah was last in sequence of revelation, 9:5, ayat al-saif, is "the great abrogator".

To discover the real meaning, open the Jihad book of any of the six sittah.

Reply->

elee • Feb 24, 2018 at 13:23

What is this dhimmi shill doing in the government of my country?

Reply->

harvey a. epstein • Feb 24, 2018 at 12:51

Wonderful article. Unfortunately, far too many people, currently in power, still think that the world is flat: they either look and do not see what the truth is, or they just fail to look at all. They follow the Islamist Pied Piper over an intellectual cliff. A simple reading of a non-interpolated Koran should lead them to the truth. Verse 9:29 divides the world into three types of people: 1. the compliant Muslim; 2. the d'himini (Christians and Jews) who get to live in complete subjugation under the heel of Islam; and 3. everyone else who must either convert or die. Verse 9:30 is a simple prayer: "Destroy (some translations say "Kill") the Christians and the Jews." As Chiam Weizmann once wrote to Albert Einstein "...What part of the phrase "Kill all Jews' is it that you fail to understand?"

I have just completed a book on this entire subject, written for my grandchildren. They must learn the truth about what we in the west are really facing. I also point out to them that a minority of Muslims are trying to transform Islam so that it can coexist with the west. My belief is that it is "too little, too late". I hope I am wrong.

Your voice, and articles like this, should stand as a warning to the rest of the world. I hope that your voice is more than just a shout into an intellectual wilderness; but please continue to shout.

As an aside to those who have yet to actually read the Koran: the "good stuff" contained in the Koran (much of it is found in Chapters 2 and 17) has been fairly abrogated by the "Later Revelations contained in Chapter 9"; this in accordance with verse 2:106. Should you wish to do a quick comparison of various translations of the Koran, let me suggest the site islamawakened.com. Here you will find 55 side-by-side versions of the text. Based upon my other readings, they seem to do a good job of it.

Reply->

Paul • Feb 24, 2018 at 12:26

The fear of the Europeans stemming from an uncontrolled migration with the encouragement of leaders like Merkel is undeniable. Europeans, through their Brussels elites, are losing the battle for public influence and space. The majority of population is suppressed in their views fearing authorities' backlash and accusations of racism and islamophobia. Legitimizing sharia-run enclaves resulting in non-go zones is common and growing. Central European countries resist the push by Brussels to accept the so-called 'quotas' for new migrants. They are well aware that this clash of cultures will dismantle the nation-states and that the war of civilizations will be lost.

Reply->

af • Feb 24, 2018 at 11:56

How about a Gatestone article on how much Trump does or doesn't know about this topic? People who should know better, with McMaster and George W. Bush at the top of the list of those who should know better, seem to be in policy formulating positions. Too many have been insisting for far too long, that Islam is really a "religion of peace." What trash! Wherever people are being murdered and maimed all over the world, 99*+% of the time, it's being done by believers in "the religion of peace."

Reply->

Solomon • Feb 24, 2018 at 11:51

Jihad is the route to the promises of Islam. Funded from a mandated levy falsely labelled charity.

Reply->

Ron Thompson • Feb 24, 2018 at 11:14

This is the strongest and most accurate indictment I have yet read dissecting the rationalizations, evasions, and obfuscations which claim that terrorist mass murder by Muslims has Nothing To Do With Islam. I might add the suggestion that all those, Muslim and non-Muslims, who peddle this idea be asked, "if that's true, then WHY is the religion so easily 'hijacked' or 'perverted' that tens of thousands who flocked to the hyper-violent ISIS 'caliphate' from dozens of Muslim-majority countries and the Muslim communities of Europe?"

The same question could be asked in relation to many other violent actions and violent speech in Muslim-majority countries and especially in the turbulent Muslim communities in Western Europe.

The fuss going on now in Washington about National Security Clearances is also something of a joke when we know that the single most important question - Can you consider that Islam is a religion and political ideology every bit as dangerous and supremacist as Communism and Fascism were? - is not only not being asked but is affirmatively prohibited from being asked or being the subject of research and seminars in the Department of Defense and our military academies, and much more publicly, in public hearings in both houses of Congress.

Reply->

jay Ron Thompson • Feb 25, 2018 at 02:01

Great question! We have a country that has already been established by hundreds of years of work by our forefathers. Islam's method for expansion is not to build their own country...but to infiltrate, plunder, rape and take over what you have built..including your army!

Reply->

george • Feb 24, 2018 at 10:52

I hope H.R. McMaster reads this article.

Reply->

Bill • Feb 24, 2018 at 10:34

Pardon me for being cynical (realistic). McMaster knows very well that Islam is a religion of SUPREMACISM, AUTHORITARIANISM and conquest. The fact can be nothing less than he and others like him see Islam as a wonderful vehicle for imposition of globalist elitism.

Reply->

Stephen L Sweeney • Feb 24, 2018 at 09:59

Communism and Islam are both totalitarian political philosophies ...neither is a religion.

Reply->

Amar • Feb 24, 2018 at 09:20

One question is how the US got this deep into denial of the obvious.

Follow the Middle East money.

Reply->

David Ashton • Feb 24, 2018 at 07:42

That analysis by Higgins is absolutely right. It deserves wide circulation.

Reply->

David • Feb 24, 2018 at 07:38

McMaster's senior advisor on terrorism is Mustafa Javed Ali, the individual chiefly responsible for eradicating accurate information about Islamic terrorism at FBI several years back. I used to work for Ali and listened to him several times recount his "accomplishments" at FBI.

Reply->

Andrew Boughton • Feb 24, 2018 at 05:43

The trial comments of an Australian jihadist whose plots were foiled with the help of Israeli intelligence, and those of the judge, are refreshingly candid.

Sydney Morning Herald:

Khaja himself had said he was motivated not by watching YouTube videos but "straight from the verses of Quran."

The facial expression of a would-be terrorist talking about killing as many innocent people as he could was "like he was planning a picnic", according to a Sydney judge.

Tamim Khaja, 20, who has pleaded guilty to doing an act in preparation for, or planning a terrorist act, had been to scope out potential target buildings in Sydney including the Parramatta District Court precinct and Timor Army Barracks.

At his sentencing hearing in the Supreme Court at Parramatta on Friday, Justice Desmond Fagan referred to surveillance footage of Khaja speaking with two undercover police officers.

"He is filmed talking to people he thought were of the same ideology as he directs them to Timor Barracks at Dundas, and his facial expression when talking about killing as many innocent people as he could was very much like he was planning a picnic," the judge said.

Justice Fagan described the then-teenager's face as expressionless - as it was when he spoke about having a large enough car to drive into people.

"He does seem in a state of a possessed religious fanaticism, devoid of empathy or humanity," the judge said.

He also stressed that the Muslim religion was not on trial but, as sentencing judge, he had to try and identify the source of Khaja's "depraved belief".

Khaja himself had said he was motivated not by watching YouTube videos but "straight from the verses of Quran".

The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute.
Both reserve the right not to publish replies to articles should they so choose.
Gatestone Institute is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization, Federal Tax ID #454724565.